Hey guys,

can I just say, what a time to be alive. The state quarantine is still in place and nature is reaping all the benefits. I executed my plan and I am so glad I did. This is what it looked like:

I threw on some dirty sneakers, leggings, and an oversized hoodie. After I was dressed, I put on the face mask that is beginning to feel more and more like an accessory, like sunglasses. Then I stepped outside, and was instantly greeted by sunshine, a steady breeze, and the sound of geese overhead. I wasn’t too far from Jamaica Pond. So I made my way there, alone because my sister and mother are essential workers, and I found a vacant spot on the grass. There wasn’t too many people circling the pond the week I went, but of course those who graced the pond with their presence kept their distance. I sat on the ground and I tried to visualize myself as one with the Earth. I wanted to feel the bond that countless women felt, that connection between land and being that we’ve read so much about.

To be honest, I didn’t expect to feel an overwhelming serenity take over me. I didn’t expect to feel so grounded so calm. And yet, maybe after 15-20 minutes of meditation, I felt it. Peace. I was in no rush, I was merely acknowledging my existence here on this ground. On some days, I brought my yoga mat. It was wonderful. And it was beautiful. The trees were beginning to bloom and I, too, felt like I was capable of a rebirth, a fresh start. Through meditation, the nature around me taught me that letting go was not as hard as it may seem, and that starting anew could be just what I needed.

Overall, I think I may just take up this practice outside the borders of this assignment. I encourage all to try this as well, it was truly a spiritual experience.

Everything in love and growth,

Cece X.

Hello my lovely friends,

I can’t express how pleased I am that you could personally join me here today on this blog. This blog is a personal one, a personal quest for personal growth. Personally, this was the one blog I have been looking forward to all semester- a chance to see my eco-feminist knowledge put to work! It took me a long minute to decide what ecofeminist issue mattered the most to my life. They all seem to carry their own weight to which each deserves adequate attention. And yet, as I reflected on past readings, I was most moved by the activism and courage displayed by the women of Standing Rock. Native American women are harmonious with the land, so in sync and connected that they share the pain of one another’s blow. That is truly inspiring.

For this week, I want to attempt to cultivate the same bond those women shared with the nature around them. I want to use this week to explore the untouched pieces of land that are scattered across the Brookline area. I want to go out at least once everyday and meditate while surrounded by the sight of trees, the sound of birds, and the feel of the wind. I live right next to Jamaica Pond and I’m not too far away from Franklin Park so those two areas will be my focus areas. It doesn’t hurt that there are less people outside nowadays so I have a better chance of self-reflection and bonding with nature. I hope to gain some perspective into why the land means so much to so many women across the world. I hope to gain this perspective just by actively existing in it.

I believe my plan will work. The weather is getting nicer and the flowers are beginning to bloom again. So now is the perfect time, in my opinion, to begin a relationship with the land that gives back to me every single day. In gaining this perspective, it is my hope that I can always teach my loved ones to appreciate the beauties of nature. I want to lead by example. I can’t wait to start!

Everything in love,

Cece X

To my readers and fellow classmates, hello. I hope you are all personally doing well and learning to cope with the situation at hand. Remember, do not neglect your mental health/ self-care. 

This post will be discussing the fundamentals and importance of intersectionality and ecofeminism (in case the title didn’t give it away). In all seriousness, this topic is very important to me. It reminds me of the stressful period in high school where I was prompted to write a college essay explaining who I was or something I have been through/overcame. I remember thinking; “What is the one experience in my life that could accurately define me? What is one story I could share that would help explain who I am in this moment?” I ended up writing several pieces and willing my teachers to pick the best one- as if they could decide what sounded the most compelling about me. It was quite an experience, one I’m assuming we all share.

Let’s backtrack for a minute. What is intersectionality? In my own definition, it is the cross-overs of social issues or systems of oppression. It is a more accurate lens in which to view social distresses, one that bridges them together. In Intersectionality and the Changing Face of Ecofeminsim, A.E. Kings explains the origin of the term:

“The term intersectionality, which is generally attributed to Kimberlé Crenshaw, began as a metaphorical and conceptual tool used to highlight the inability of a single-axis framework to capture the lived experiences of black women.” (63)

Indeed, this term was coined when Crenshaw fought for the Black Feminist perspective. Her case reflected a intersectionality of oppression including race and gender, not either or.

“Reflecting upon one’s position, especially when speaking from a point of privilege, helps to avoid the unintentional marginalization of other groups or identities, as was the case with black women in the feminist and anti-racist movements.” (63, 64)

Being able to ask the other question, as the excerpt puts it, is an essential skill to develop when considering (eco)feminist theories. It works to keep us aware of our own privilege as well as the varies systems of oppression that work against us. Intersectionality helps us to expand our identities and bridge together our similarities as well as our differences. There is not one person I know that would be content with defining themselves under one umbrella of identification. I am more than a woman, therefore, there is more at work than my gender that impacts my life here in the U.S.

My professor uploaded this image for our viewing:

Kings wrote:

“Each spoke of the web represent[s] a continuum of different types of social categorisation such as gender, sexuality, race, or class; while encircling spirals depict individual identities. The spirals collide with each spoke at a different level of the continuum, illustrating the context-specific privilege or discrimination experienced by the individual.” (65)

Moreover, during the second week of our course, we learned about ecofeminist principles from The Ecology of Feminist and the Feminism of Ecology (1989) by Ynestra King. The second one being:

“Life on earth is an interconnected web, not a hierarchy. There is no natural hierarchy; human hierarchy is projected onto nature and then used to justify social domination. Therefore, ecofeminist theory seeks to show the connections between all forms of domination, including the domination of nonhuman nature, and ecofeminist practice is necessarily antihierarchical.”

These quotes are important to consider because both place an emphasis on the social structure of oppression. We must not place our separates pains on a scale from 1-10. Pain is pain, and thereby, oppression is oppression. There is no hierarchy when considering the former. I like this illustration of the web because it signifies a mutual, level ground. It shows that our oppressions are intersecting, meaning they are connected to one another. We cannot address one system of oppression if we cannot address all of them. Crenshaw demonstrated that as well.

Ecofeminist theory is also a demonstration of exercising the tools of intersectionality.

” Ecofeminism recognizes the ethical interconnection of the domination of women and the domination and exploitation of nature. The historical precedent which separates and sets humans above nature is also responsible for enforcing the ‘violent rupture’ between humankind and nature—which helps to render humanity ignorant of its duty towards the natural environment and the non-human other. ” (69)

Kings is highlighting the negative affects of constructing a social hierarchy on the basis of gender, it not only affects humans as a whole, but the environment as well. My last post shows evidence of environmental degradation and exploitation in connection to women. Remember Standing Rock. These issues do not stand alone. neither are they obsolete.

Lastly, I included Beyoncé’s “Formation” video because it “alone depicts how the intersections of oppression in environmental racism and sexism have occurred and will continue to in the face of climate change.” (Cain, Black Feminist Though 2016). Please enjoy, stay sharp, and be safe.

Everything in love,

Cece X

https://muse-jhu-edu.libproxy.umassd.edu/article/660551

The Ecology of Feminist and the Feminism of Ecology (1989) by Ynestra King.

https://medium.com/black-feminist-thought-2016/the-necessity-of-black-women-s-standpoint-and-intersectionality-in-environmental-movements-fc52d4277616

Dear viewers.

Thank you for making the conscious decision to tune into my blog and join me this week on the conversation of gendered oppression and nature. It is truly an engaging topic and thus highlights the intersectionalities of oppression that we have been following all semester. I also hope by the end of this blog, you will remain vigilant and aspire to inspire. Activism works.

We will be examining a few articles and videos in the order that I received and digested them. Afterwards, I encourage you to interact with my concluding analysis.

I will begin with an article found on VICE.com, dated more than 5 years ago. The article focuses on Recife, Brazil, or what could be referred to as “the slums.” Recife has suffered from garbage-filled canals and filthy water.

Photo by Diego Nigro/JC Imagem

This abuse of land has directly impacted generations of locals, ranging from elderly persons to young children. 10-year-old Larissa Silva, who is now older than 15 years old, suffered from chronic ringworm, according to the article.

“When I met her at the cardboard house she shares with her family she asked me, “Do you think I like living here?” I said no, and she responded, “But I do. It’s the only life I know.” (Corrêa, Talita. VICE)

Within that quote alone, there is much to unpack. First of all, the child lived in a cardboard house with her family, which included her mom and two young siblings. That is no way to live. This family desperately needed the help of their government, yet it continued to fail them. Their community failed them. This failure has endured for so long that slum-like conditions have become normalized into the lives of Recifes residents, including Larissa. This story then compels me to draw connections between environmental degradation and the marginalized. The poor class, above all, gets hit the hardest because of greed and our man-made problems.

Next, I will consider the YouTube series entitled; “2015 Gendered Impacts series(4):Land is Identity.” The video summarizes the impacts of industrialization on Indigenous land for Indigenous women. The video reveals this noteworthy point, spoken by Indigenous woman Anne Marie Sam:

“They just tell you that there’s going to be lots of jobs and lots of money coming into the area and so we need to let this mine go through.”

Industrial companies and workers are therefore exposed for their inability to respect and comply with Indigenous culture and customs. Workers in this 2015 case completely neglect indigenous peoples’ connection and commitment to their land. It is important to understand how Indigenous people nurture a mutually beneficial bond with nature. To destroy something that has been preserved for decades is not just disrespectful. It is disgusting. Money is not the priority. The natural world is the priority.

The video continues in the next series with a testimony from indigenous woman Gloria Chicaiza:

“These two things are linked for us: the exploitation of land and the exploitation of women’s bodies.”

The video then includes the message:

“Resource extraction often leads to violence against Indigenous women.”

There is a evident correlation between industrialization, the increased use of drugs/alcohol and domestic abuse. Therefore, it was not uncommon that industrial workers physically abused Indigenous women who were recorded as vulnerable, defenseless, and traumatized.

In an article published by The Guardian, I learned more about the resistance at Standing Rock, where Native American women led the movement against the Dakota Access pipeline in 2016. These women were stripped naked, arrested, and spent considerable amounts of time in cells/cages because they were protecting their home. They were dehumanized and killed in cold blood. Sadly, this is the 21st century we are living in.

Imagine planting roots on a land claimed by no one. Imagine watering these roots and nurturing everything that sprout forth. Imagine sharing the fruits of your labor with a community that has also planted roots all around you. The people, alongside the sprouted roots, have become your family.This was the indigenous community, in a nutshell. Now imagine someone coming out of nowhere and demanding you uproot everything you have worked so hard to protect. Not only that, but to vacate the land so that they can build something “better.” Imagine this person proclaiming that they know what is best for you and the community. Industrialization has dislocated many indigenous communities and I know one blog post will not end that but it has to start somewhere. Tearing apart the natural world will- without a doubt- hurt the people, the women, who have centered their whole culture around it. What makes your home a home? How might you feel if your home were to be invaded, molded into something you could barely recognize? This is something I hope we all continue to consider in the weeks to come.

Stay safe.

Everything in love,

Cece X.

Sources included:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/kwpwja/the-brazilian-slum-children-who-are-literally-swimming-in-garbage-0000197-v21n1

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/04/dakota-access-pipeline-protest-standing-rock-women-police-abuse

To all who have come across my blog, hello. It’s been a troubling couple of weeks, how are you? There is an unsettled energy lingering in the air and the ability focus has continuously proven difficult for me. Nonetheless, we are all alive and present. I feel that is important to acknowledge.

This week, I read a research dissertation on links between environmental degradation and women in political power. The title is called GENDER EQUALITY AND STATE ENVIRONMENTALISM by Kari Norgaard (University of California–Davis) and Richard York (University of Oregon). The dissertation was centered around data collected from Norway and Singapore. In the initial paragraphs, I pulled this quote:

“In an unequal society, the impacts of
environmental degradation fall disproportionately on the least powerful.” (507)

The society we live in is disproportionately unequal. We can walk a few feet away from our houses and see just that. We can turn on the news and see just that. In light of recent events, it has become clearer now than ever how negatively impacted the “least powerful”- or women, minorities, and lower income to no income communities- are.

Norgaard and York go on to prove that when women are appointed to Parliament, the status of the environment improves significantly. However, it is not always the women who push policies that benefit nature. These professors were led to believe that diversity in politics or the presence of women among men works in the favor of the environment as well.  They point out that the gender variable has a stronger association than all but one factor with state environmentalism. Those factors include percentage GDP in service, capitalist, urban percentage, and political freedom. The one it did not surpass was GDP per capita (measure of a country’s economic output that accounts for its number of people.)

“Our results clearly suggest that the representation of women in national Parliament may contribute to the development of state environmentalism” (513)

While the evidence and research were all thorough, neither researcher could give a solid answer as to why women were more inclined to preserve the environment and take less environmental risks than men. In their conclusion, however, they did say this:

“These reasons include the fact that women have more pro-environmental values, are more risk averse, are more likely to participate in social movements, typically suffer disproportionately from environmental degradation, and sexism and environmental
degradation can be mutually reinforcing processes.” (519)

Upon further research, I found an article written by Dorceta E. Taylor entitled: Race, Class, Gender, and American Environmentalism.

Employed by the U.S.D.A., Taylor offered this reasoning; “Because women had the responsibility for raising the family,
concern about housing and sanitation were paramount.” (18)

In more words, women are historically known for housekeeping and childcare. We know this. Taylor adds that because we were home more than men, we were made more aware of the hazardous conditions that threatened the community. We saw the effects of industrialization and, naturally, concerns arose around sanitation, water supply, and food. So women and the environment have always been closely interconnected because of a mutual impact.

York and Norgaard went on to affirm ecofeminist claims that gender equality could improve the condition of the environment and that women need increased representation in politics if we want environmental policies to be pushed to the public agenda. This is a notion I could get behind 100%! Right away, I think of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or AOC, who is a new and current member of Congress. Aside from the fact that she is apart of the largest representation of women in Congress EVER in recorded history, her and other colleagues have tirelessly been trying to push a Green New Deal to the political agenda. According to a 2019 article on CNBC, his new deal would “remake the U.S. economy and drastically reduce the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.”

“That framework called for generating 100 percent of the nation’s power from renewable sources, making all buildings energy efficient and eliminating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector and industry — all within about 10 years.” (Tom DiChristopher, CNBC)

Here’s an interesting statistic and supporting evidence as to why women and environmental conditions are so closely intertwined:

“Globally, women are responsible for half of the world’s food production. In most Global South countries, women produce between 40-80% of food, and are are central stewards of seeds and agricultural biodiversity. [UN Food & Agricultural Organization. Women and Sustainable Food Security.​]” 

All in all, I want to conclude with a message of comfort. All of you, your family, and your loved ones are in my prayers. I pray for nothing but safety and good health during these unprecedented times. I know this is scary and it might feel like there is no end in sight. Still, we are in this together.

Everything in love,

Cece X

Sources:

https://pages.uoregon.edu/norgaard/pdf/Gender-Equality-Norgaard-York-2005.pdf

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/07/aoc-just-updated-her-massive-green-new-deal–heres-whats-in-it.html

https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr534.pdf

https://www.wecaninternational.org/why-women

Trigger warning. This blog may contain sensitive material in relation to abortion and reproductive rights. I will try to be as objective as possible.

Picture source: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/new-york-ny-may-21-2019-1404095372

For this week’s learning, I was instructed to read and analyze Ronnie Zoe Hakwins’ excerpt entitled: “Reproductive Choices: The Ecological Dimension.” In the beginning of this reading, Hawkins wrote:

“In this essay I will argue that environmental considerations are relevant to the abortion debate and, conversely, that the abortion dispute ought to enter into a discussion of ‘feminism and the environment.'” (Hakwins, 690)

In other words, Hawkins intentions includes convincing the reader that one cannot consider the national debate on abortion without the global implications. Hawkins emphasized the population. She drew connections between the “5 and 6 billion people worldwide” and the restrictions and/or access to birth control.

Hawkins points out that our global environment suffers because of our increasing population. There are links between poverty and environmental degradation, or what she calls a

“downward spiral.– a growing number of poor people are forced to make a living on increasingly marginal land, with resultant deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, or an assortment of other environmental problems further exacerbating their poverty and often leading them to move on and repeat the process elsewhere.”

In this respect, I completely agree with Hakwins. There are women out there having babies against their will with the full knowledge that they won’t be able to care for that child in a way that that child deserves. However, women who do not have access to abortion clinics are forced to conceive a human being without the support that they need. As a result, they are now responsible for two lives. Eventually, they fall below the poverty line if they were not already there to begin with.

“While efforts to diminish consumption and to restructure the global economic scheme can and should be advocated in light of this relation, so can a further slowing of our rate of population increase.” (Hawkins, 692)

If every woman had a right to abortion and access to clinics, those who are not ready to become mothers would not have to be. Moreover, we could decrease the population growth and that would gradually become beneficial for the environment. Humans continue to demolish nature’s beauty, disrupt natural habitats and ecosystems. By taking this one step to slow the growth of our populations, other species can prosper.

It’s like killing several birds with one stone. If everyone were pro-choice, the human population and the environment would benefit. Feminist Katha Pollitt argues that abortion could be viewed as a public good.

“Pollitt notes, for example, that between 1970 and 1990, “the Pill accounted for nearly three quarters of the increase in the number of women who became doctors and lawyers.”

This shows that women who are able to control the course of their own lives can contribute positively to our society. Women deserve the rights to abortion because they have more to offer than the patriarchal role designed for them. Women can be more than mothers. Women can be more than mothers. Women can be more than mothers.

”the right to an abortion is fundamental to women’s equality, not just our privacy.” (Valenti, The Guardian)

Everyone please take care during these unprecedented times.

Everything in love,

Cece X.

Sources: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/14/abortion-right-to-privacy-women-right-to-equality

Hawkins, Ronnie Zoe. “Reproductive Choice: The Ecological Dimension.” 1993.

Image source: https://caroljadams.com/examples-of-spom/

I chose the pictures above because I found them to be the most cringe-worthy pictures out of the slideshow of cringe-worthy pictures. The first one on burger urge features a white male doctor helping deliver a burger as substitute for a baby. I’m honestly still GAGGING. The pun is being able to deliver food right to your doorstep.

The second picture features a pig in a popular Marilyn Monroe pose- the pig even wears the white dress. GAG.

The third picture is of a picture. Carl could finally claim he’d gotten to second base. Our white male friend, Carl, is milking a cow. Milking. A. Cow. GAGGGGGGGGGGGGGG! I’m actually sick. (And I’m not even vegan!)

These pictures work to enforce the narrative the women can be associated to animals in a sexual sense. By sexualizing these animals, popular media (controlled majorly by white cis men) objectifies women in that same notion. Women are seen less as people, humans, and more as objects.

This is not new information.

If you are a woman, you know.

For women, these are terribly oppressive ads that have circulated Western media for decades. For Black women, this can be fatal. Already, Black women are the most vulnerable people in America. They face several intersecting systems of oppression that feminist author Carol Adams doesn’t cover in The Politics of Meat. By further objectifying Black women, misogynist men are able to justify their physical and mental attacks on the oppressed minority.

Adams does highlight some origins to the women/animal associations. In one out of her nine feminist-vegan points,  Adams says:

“Female animals are the absent referents in meat eating and in the consumption of dairy and eggs. There would be no meat eating if female animals weren’t constantly made pregnant. Female animals are forced to produce feminized protein, (plant protein produced through the abuse of the reproductive cycle of female animals, i.e., dairy and eggs).”(Adams, 13)

Through unpacking this point, I am led to believe that because female animals can produce, just like female humans can, therefore they could be easily associated with one another. Moreover, the manhandling of women could be justified by the manhandling of animals. I don’t know if anyone else is reading it the way I am but this is just ludicrous reasoning. And yet, our society bought it, time and time again.

“Consumption is the fulfillment of oppression, the annihilation of will, of separate identity.” (Adams, 14)

Those who watch advertisements, commercials, and billboard ads are consumers. They take in the images and associations, many internalizing them without challenge. THAT is the problem. Mass consumers are easily influenced when it comes to pop culture and media. Why aren’t people being taught to be socially conscious on a national scale? Why are we not being taught until college to critique and examine advertisements? Why have we let this problem linger? I feel like I’m ranting at this point.

All in all, I didn’t very much enjoy the perspective of this feminist. Maybe it’s because I am not a vegan, I am not an expert in eco-feminism, and I am not white. Carol Adams brings forth a privileged narrative whereas underprivileged communities cannot afford an alternative, more eco-friendly diet. I also believe that this narrative ignores the perspective of Native American women who have fought to protect their lands and the nature within them while still hunting for food in a sustainable way. She touches upon black women who represents a wild animal in contrast to a white women representing a slutty animal but I believe this deserves further unpacking. (16)

I don’t see the biggest issue as being the treatment of animals, eating a cow that could’ve been your pet pony, etc. I do believe that animals deserve better treatment. And if you refer to my last blog, I enforce the narrative the animals belong in nature, not in confined spaces. However, it bothers me how Adams never mentioned how this internalization affects women, in particular Black women surrounded by Western culture. They are targets because of this messaging. And we need to publish narratives that empower them, that show that they are beautiful and powerful, just like animals, just like nature (if that association has to be made at all.)

Everything in love,

Cece X

P.S. please inform me if I come off as threatening or confrontational, that is no my intention!

https://animalclock.org/

My professor posted an image for this week that can be found at the end of this post. There is a cutting board suspended in white oblivion, and on top of the cutting board is what looks to be meat. Pork, maybe? Then, what looks like the cousin of the Pillsbury figure, is cutting slices of the meat for consumption with a sharp over-sized knife. Pillsbury’s cousin appears to be a male chef, pushing the narrative that meat is for men.

With a description of this image in mind, I began pondering over the gendered foods and associations within our modern-day society. Men have always been portrayed as the meat-eaters, because for some odd reason, to eat steak and bacon is to “eat like a man.” (Zoe Eisenberg, Huffpost) When I watch commercials for Outback Steakhouse, for example, it is accompanied by a white Western male eating a hearty burger. Many male athletes are even featured in commercials in which they glorify meat consumption. In addition, there is this circulating stigma that women are expected to order a salad when out on a date and men- you guessed it- meat.

These associations were of no natural process. In fact, the media industry is one of the huge driving forces that actively work to normalize the idea of gendered foods.

“Backed up by the entertainment industry is the idea that the bloodier the steak, the more manly the man” (Aynide Howell, vegan chef )

It is bizarre to consider that some men actually believe that eating plant-based foods and refraining from non-human animal meat would make them less of a man. That vegetarianism is somehow emasculating. And yet, this is the world we live in. Greta Gaard explains how eco-feminists perceive our relationship to food and non-human animals. In her reading, she spoke about how she believes there is a linkage “between the oppression of women and the oppression of animals.” (Gaard, 20) Animals were never purposed to be domesticated. They are, after all, apart of nature. They belong in the while. Yet, humans have them in factories.

“To be a pet is to have all one’s life decisions controlled by someone else: when and what to eat, how to act, whom to socialize with, whether or not to reproduce. If the situation were offered to humans, we’d call it slavery.” (Gaard, 20)

She goes on to point out that modern society has linguistic associations with women and animals, thus dehumanizing us. We’ve all heard it before, I’m sure. The cat-calling. It’s gross and undeniably uncomfortable. Yet, again, the world we live in right?

Deane Curtin is another ecofeminist who highlights the effect food has had on women in relation to their bodies. Curtain believed the body should always be a “moral agent” (Curtin, 68) when deciding what foods to consume. The body is a precious vessel and should be taken care of. But for many women, in particular, the obsession with food or lack thereof can evolve into anorexia.

“Anorexics typically feel alienation from their bodies and the hunger “it” feels.” (Curtin, 68)

I believe its important to take care of your body. After all, you only get one. However, I reject the idea that you are apart from your body. We cannot let society’s standards of beauty cause us to starve ourselves because we’d be hurting none other than ourselves. Eat that salad if you wish, but eat, eat, eat! Curtin tells readers that being a “contextual moral vegetarian,” doesn’t mean you need to cancel meat altogether. If the time calls for it, you answer. If your child is starving and without a vegan source of food, you can feed them meat.

“The point of a contextualist ethic is that one need not treat all interests equally as if one had no relationship to any of the parties.” (68)

I like this idea better because although I would love to cancel meat from my diet, a vegan lifestyle is not one I could afford right now. Also, I don’t have the resources available to actively engage in this lifestyle… ONE DAY.

Lastly, I’d like to tackle the idea that gendered foods stem from patriarchy. To begin, YES. Curtin said it best:

“Vegetarianism is not a gender neutral issue. To choose one’s diet in a patriarchal culture is one way of politicizing an ethic of care. It marks a daily, bodily commitment to resist ideological pressures to conform to patriarchal standards, and to establishing contexts in which caring for can be non abusive.” (Curtin)

 

Sources:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meat-heads-new-study-focuses_b_8964048

http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-m/curtin01.htm

https://www.academia.edu/2489929/Ecofeminism_on_the_Wing_Perspectives_on_Human-Animal_Relations

I want to begin this blog by meditating on a quote, without context, taken from “Touching the Earth“:

“Collective black self-discovery takes place when we begin to renew our relationship to the Earth, when we remember the way of our ancestors. When the Earth is sacred to us, our bodies can also be sacred to us.”

.

.

.

On Fridays and Saturdays for the majority of 2019, I worked as a security officer on State St, located in Boston, MA. My hours were from 11 PM-7 AM, AKA the graveyard shift. I would sit behind a desk that had two desktop screens where I could monitor cameras and alarms. I was the only one on duty at my site during this time. It was ultimately very boring and draining. However, during the sunrise, I had the best view. I would take the elevator up 12 floors and unlock the doors that led to the balcony that overlooked the Boston Harbor. That’s where this picture was taken and uploaded onto Snapchat.

More than half of my life has been spent in the city. Long and tall buildings with hundreds of stairs and windows have become normalized. When it is quiet, it makes me uneasy. The noise of the city brings me comfort. I have grown accustomed to the lights, the speed, and the sights. This is city life. This is my life.

Now I would like us to consider Terry Tempest Williams. In the chapter “Home work” from his reading entitled; “Red“, Williams brings up some very interesting points. He begins the chapter with repetitions of the phrase;

“Place + people = Politics. ” (Williams, pg.3)

Here he argument was made that this phrase was not as simple as originally intended. Western civilization has added to, molded, and completely altered the phrase until it became abstract, full of layers. If one might factor in social, human, and environmental rights (to which we are all quite familiar) then we see that “this territory is not neutral. (Williams, pg.3) Williams also believed that we could achieve conversations through story.

“Story bypasses rhetoric and pierces the heart.” (Williams, pg.3,4)

I can agree with that philosophy. I am a strong believer that we are connected through stories. In a well-told story, we can visualize our differences, our similarities, and what makes us all human. We can draw comfort and community through our shared emotions and common experiences. Boston, for example, looks significantly different from the Boston I grew up in. Gentrification has gripped the city with two sturdy hands. However, I can still remember the empty lot by Stop n Shop, where my friends and I would ride our bikes in no particular fashion, race through puddles and laugh until the street lights turned on. Now that same vacant piece of space is what many might know as Boston Landing. Because of all the construction and skyscrapers in my childhood playground, the sunlight can no longer reach there.

The “landscape of minimalism” will mean more as our capitalist society deepens its reach on infrastructure and economy, We will be reminded “how precious the desert is to the soul of America. ” (Williams, pg.6)

I do not want to standby as the industrialized world expands and the natural world diminishes.

I hope that one day soon, we can use our voices together in union to demonstrate a “bedrock democracy, standing our ground in the places we love, together.” (Williams, 19)

If it is not evident by now that our natural spaces need to be preserved, let us consider Barbara Kingsolver (an awesome name), and her transcript excerpt: Knowing Our Place. She paints a beautiful picture of a simple life. She is surrounded by her family, nature’s pleasures, and peace. The pace of her life on this ranch is a wholesome one, dripping with an abundance of happiness. This was my favorite part:

“I take walks in the woods, I hang out our laundry, I read stories to my younger child, I hike down the hollow to a sunnier spot where I look after the garden that feeds us. And most of all, I write. I work in a rocking chair on the porch, or at a small blue desk facing the window. I write a good deal by hand, on paper, which — I somehow can’t ever forget — is made from the macerated hearts of fallen trees.”

Kingsolver (is anyone else reading it as kingslayer or is it just me??) argues through her story that humans can truly benefit from the wild. It nurtures us physically, mentally, and spiritually. So why would anyone neglect that? Why rid ourselves from an entity willing to sustain us? Why tear down the ecosystem that cleans our air and provides essential oxygen?… I still wrestle with these questions. If you think you can provide a satisfactory answer, please leave me a comment!

Everything in love,

Cece X

Sources:

http://jdyck.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/1/5/19153179/touching_the_earth.pdf

http://www.pbs.org/now/printable/transcript_smallwonder_print.html

Williams, Terry Tempest. “Red.”

Water. That incoherent voice in your head probably read it as it appeared before your eyes. What connections did you just make, just now? Maybe you thought of the beach, ponds, or the Charles River (if you’re from Boston). Maybe you thought of faucet water, taking a hot shower, or even sipping on a nice cold bottle of LIFE WTR. Whatever associations you’ve made when you hear the word; water, it typically is derived from your experience with the liquid substance.

What if your experiences or associations were drastically different though? What if water, to you, meant safety hazards, sanitation, clean/dirty, shortage of supply, daily chores, or risk of infection? For many low-income areas across the rural, global South, these connections are common.

Source: https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/gender/

The image shown above is nothing less than a powerful one. For many young women across the Global South, going to school is a scarce privilege. If they are not tending to the duties of the household, women are expected to retrieve water that would be used for cooking, cleaning, bathing, and sanitation. Water sources were not always in close proximity either. According to the Unwater organization, this took up the majority of a day to complete. In 25 Sub-Saharan African countries, women collectively take up “16 million hours a day collecting drinking water.” The data is extremely disproportionate to that of men. Ultimately, this task would have a poor effect on women’s access and time for education. “Reducing the time it takes to fetch water from 30 to 15 minutes increased girls’ school attendance by 12% according to a study in Tanzania. (UNICEF).” This is a major issue. Because of environmental degradation, women are suffering. They are being held to a low societal standard in response to the drying environment that surrounds them. These women deserve an education that serves them.

It is appropriate now, then, to introduce Bina Agarwal. In her chapter of Feminist Studies; The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India, she tackles eco-feminism in a very new and critical way. She argues that women, especially in poor rural areas, “are victims of environmental degradation in quite gender-specific ways.” (Agarwal, 119) This contrasts the popular Western version of ecofeminism that women are connected to nature through that of domination, healing, and restoration, it has more ideological ties. This belief places anything female and nonhuman below men, according to Agarwal. This we know to be true. However, Agarwal brings attention to the pre-colonial period in the Third World, where conflict already existed between class, race, sexuality, and gender. “Poor peasant and tribal women have typically been responsible for fetching fuel and fodder and in the hill and tribal communities have also often been the main cultivators.” (Agarwal, 126) With this information, we can conclude that women learned more about nature than men through experience and interacting with it. Thus two interpretations could spring from this history: women are both “victims to the destruction of nature and as repositories of knowledge about nature, in ways distinct from the men of their class.” (126).

Taking in this non-Western perspective- which I have only begun to grasp in its entirety- and comparing it with that of Warren and Hobgood-Oster, I cannot decide which I find more appealing. Both stances speak to a different interpretation of women’s history, both encourage the destruction of the patriarchy which I truly enjoy. I admire how the Industrial Era is tied to colonial men and environmental degradation in Agarwal’s writing. It seems only fitting, seeing as women were generally prohibited from these professions therefore have no ties to our environmental crisis. I will have to ponder further!!

Everything in love,

Cece x